|
Post by concretedonkey on Jul 1, 2017 9:42:54 GMT
I kind of aim for higher delta V, build up a lot of speed and cut the time in the "danger zone" to mere seconds. Also my missiles are smaller 20-40kg without the droptanks. I'm finding that approach more economical than large missiles with multiple cm of anti laser armor. Those large missiles are still vulnerable to missile interceptors, kinetics and lasers firing from the sides and the back so its better to aim to lower prices and smaller missiles and overwhelm with numbers.
|
|
|
Post by concretedonkey on Jun 28, 2017 16:22:01 GMT
Turret or maybe a retractable pod, facing forward. It will be nice not to have to sacrifice the pointy nose of the ship. Also other major advantage is the rate of fire. Although I would like them to spread out a bit after they are launched... I usually lose them in groups when one of them is blown up by a laser.
|
|
|
Post by concretedonkey on Jun 27, 2017 19:04:03 GMT
Had problems before with missiles slamming in to the ship before detonating. This was a few updates ago. Back then a minimal hard detonation range like a few cm solved it. Now it seems to be causing another problem. if they still detonate then what was the problem? They did not. Sorry if it was unclear.
|
|
|
Post by concretedonkey on Jun 27, 2017 18:48:51 GMT
Had problems before with missiles slamming in to the ship before detonating. This was a few updates ago. Back then a minimal hard detonation range like a few cm solved it. Now it seems to be causing another problem.
|
|
|
Post by concretedonkey on Jun 27, 2017 18:27:54 GMT
dragonkid11 a while ago you mentioned that your nukes seem less powerful than before the update... do you per chance use a hard detonation range, even if minimal like 10cm? I had a problem today exactly with that... my nukes were mysteriously not leaving a significant impression on properly armored targets and it turned out that zero hard detonation range solved it.
|
|
|
Post by concretedonkey on Jun 25, 2017 14:05:53 GMT
I was posting my redesigned stock ships, however I stopped myself for now. They have not aged that well with the update, where I could expect a 3 to 1 kill ratio against their stock counterparts now its around 2 to 1 and only some of them point their noses at the enemy most of the time. I may have to revisit them properly before posting them on steam.
|
|
|
Post by concretedonkey on Jun 23, 2017 16:32:37 GMT
So far I'm really enjoying the update. Everything is broken but this is good kind of pain - a realistic one . I'm currently experimenting blast launching small frag bombs out of a missile in the last meters of its flight path... shows great promise if I can nail down the timing properly. However for larger stuff, I didn't expect the weight penalty of the blast launchers.. its a bit rediculous since I'm mostly using small amounts of explosive and it just doesn't make any sense for a tube for a missile to be roughly twice again the mass of the missile itself. Isn't their increased weight offset by their lower crew requirements? Only 0.4 for missiles, regardless of the amount of cells. I was trying to use them to stage missiles so crew requirements were not a factor. P.S. btw titanium diboride seems like a good replacement of boron nitride for reactors.
|
|
|
Post by concretedonkey on Jun 23, 2017 16:13:53 GMT
So far I'm really enjoying the update. Everything is broken but this is good kind of pain - a realistic one . I'm currently experimenting blast launching small frag bombs out of a missile in the last meters of its flight path... shows great promise if I can nail down the timing properly. However for larger stuff, I didn't expect the weight penalty of the blast launchers.. its a bit rediculous since I'm mostly using small amounts of explosive and it just doesn't make any sense for a tube for a missile to be roughly twice again the mass of the missile itself.
|
|
|
Post by concretedonkey on Jun 22, 2017 16:53:59 GMT
octogen sure makes everything way easier , but the price.... Penny-wise, pound-foolish. Weight and diameter are the important parameters for a micro-nuke, because they dictate how big the launcher or missile will need to be to fire it. And that system is where most of the cost of the weapon is going to live. I've retired the 95ton class frankly, exactly for that reason... this is just an exercise for the moment, with scaling up usually the explosive price is going hit you really hard... but frankly I'm not sure how true that is right now so I'm going back to making bombs cheers!
|
|
|
Post by concretedonkey on Jun 22, 2017 16:36:50 GMT
octogen sure makes everything way easier , but the price....
|
|
|
Post by concretedonkey on Jun 22, 2017 16:23:02 GMT
Huh, odd. Just checked to see if I entered any values more precisely than the GUI will display, but apparently not. Here's the import code. NuclearPayloadModule 4kt U-233 DT BFN UsesCustomName true CoreComposition U-233 ReflectorComposition Tungsten Carbide SlowExplosive CombustionReaction Nitroglycerin DelayComposition Lithium DelayCompositionMassFraction 0.615 FastExplosive Octogen CoreMass_kg 0.421 Enrichment_Percent 0.97 HollowCoreRadius_m 0.0333 InnerExplosiveWidth_m 0.0482 FusionBoost Deuterium Tritium FusionFuelDensity_kg__m3 346 Detonator HardRange_km 0 ActivationRange_km 1.15 MinimumRange_km 5 OverrideTimer_s 0 DelayedTrigger false TargetsShips true TargetsShots true
I am not sure what I did wrong previously, but after importing this design works. I was also able to get a sub-kilo nuke (if just barely) with 95t yield. No worries, nuclear hand grenades are still with us, even if they gained weight. *autistic screeching*You can get it even lighter, but I'm not sure the yield of a few tons is worth it. I've got a slight improvement with 843g and 30c but it sure seems way harder now...
|
|
|
Post by concretedonkey on Jun 22, 2017 6:00:56 GMT
This update seems a blast in every sense of the word ! I have a feeling that I'll immensely enjoy blast launchers and the new swarm options, but I have to fix everything broken before that ... it will be a busy weekend indeed.
|
|
|
Post by concretedonkey on Jun 22, 2017 4:13:25 GMT
The conventional cannon barrel armor appears way thicker than it should be:
|
|
|
Post by concretedonkey on Jun 13, 2017 15:57:38 GMT
It would be great but lets be realistic, this is a major task.It would require an order of magnitude more work and doesn't sound like a work for a single developer. I would be glad if we can get something similar to starsector - sandbox with factions and roaming.
|
|
|
Post by concretedonkey on Jun 13, 2017 5:48:26 GMT
I will go fusion the moment qswitched goes to fusion, which is what, 10 years for now ? On a more serious note , anyone on team pentane ? I'm pretty sure we'll still be saying that in 10 years. /jk I used to be solidly on team decane; now I'm all for neon and HD. decane is nice and all, especially when I go back to making ships with more armor, but its expensive. I'm trying pentane now and frankly its pretty decent balance for all drives. Managed to cut the price of everything with 10 Mc with it. P.S. And as always I'm at least a month behind everybody alternative-propellant
|
|